I mostly replied my thoughts on your other comment. But let me add that again, it isn't about French Canadians having their own content for themselves. That's again the view that's very consumer/provider capitalist driven. It is about them having a voice that reaches other Canadians, including non French Canadian ones.
So in this case, yes, I'm taking a societal view, it's showing respect, interest and that we're all listening to each other to make the best society, and giving everyone an outlet.
So you can easily say, ok, let 60% of all content be pure consumer/producer free market driven. But reserve a 40% to make sure Canadians of all circle of life and background have a voice that can reach other Canadians.
And that would also include having voices for Ontarians, yes even truckers, or anyone else who shows interest to broadcast content, they can go to the CRTC and ask for a spot, which they'd be granted proportionally, even if their content isn't a money maker that could survive the free market.
> It is about them having a voice that reaches other Canadians, including non French Canadian ones.
Does it actually?
Not that long ago we basically got a completely different sales and marketing team for that region; we were advised to basically treat it as it’s own thing. From my visits it’s quite… insular. I recall their newspapers having news from the province on the front page, then a page about the US and then Canadian/International news.
> And that would also include having voices for Ontarians, yes even truckers, or anyone else who shows interest to broadcast content, they can go to the CRTC and ask for a spot
Ahh, so they have to go vet their content and opinion to a government official before getting a government approved broadcasting right. First amendment as long as you get the government’s approval!
I'm curious what you think of an ombudsman? Do you just see them as seeking any chance to abuse their power and seek authoritarian authority and oppress your rights as well?
In a democracy, the government technically works for you, you elect it, you can choose to not re-elect them, and as part of that system some institutions are in place to protect your rights. Like ombudsman, the CRTC is an institution whose mandate is to protect voices of Canadians on broadcasts that reaches Canadians.
The CRTC is not a sensor, and cannot choose what programs the broadcasters choose to air or not, it can simply dictate that it has to air some amount of Canadian content, and that it has to promote and advertise some amount of it.
The goals of it is to make sure various Canadians have a propertionally equal air time. That's its mandate.
I'm not sure what exactly you distrust in that, a free market will govern who gets air time based on profit, revenue, and market power/consolidation. This isn't what Canadians want, they want to have a mechanism that protects their rights to broadcast themselves, even if it doesn't fit Big Media's business model of maximized revenue, or their own political leanings. So they created an institution to govern that, and make sure that within the free market, there is still guaranteed room for them to broadcast.
P.S.: First amandment is a US thing. Canada has a Charter of rights and freedoms, and it's section 2(b) which says:
> (b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication
So in this case, yes, I'm taking a societal view, it's showing respect, interest and that we're all listening to each other to make the best society, and giving everyone an outlet.
So you can easily say, ok, let 60% of all content be pure consumer/producer free market driven. But reserve a 40% to make sure Canadians of all circle of life and background have a voice that can reach other Canadians.
And that would also include having voices for Ontarians, yes even truckers, or anyone else who shows interest to broadcast content, they can go to the CRTC and ask for a spot, which they'd be granted proportionally, even if their content isn't a money maker that could survive the free market.